Recently I've become real lonely because I realized I don't have any truly close friends. While I do have friends, I don't really hang out with them much or have any true connection with them; I just talk to them during school. I watch a bit of online content/entertainment, but not very much, like streamers and youtube, and I've become semi-uncomfortable watching these people, especially if they are lesser known. There's a weird dynamic in online content, especially with streaming, where you know a bunch about the entertainer, but the entertainer knows nothing about you. You can end up feeling a close connection with the entertainer, due to knowing so many of their mannerisms, facts about their personal and daily life, their personal opinions, etc., but they know absolutely nothing about you other than your username. This makes for a sort of "uncanny valley" of communication imo, and it makes me feel weird and uncomfortable. Granted, I still watch these people, but in my current time of loneliness, I just feel weird knowing someone so closely when they know nothing of me. Have any of you experienced this? I feel like this is something I'm not alone on.

You aren't alone. I used to be like that a lot during the 2000s and even during the early 2010s. I became very self-aware on the notion just as you are explaining in this thread. That's around the time I stopped caring so much about these "people". Realizing the truth. But I've also been a hell of a lot more alone since then too. Loneliness is a rough thing these days as it seems more and more of us are going through it all the same yet alone.

>>1
Not to be mean, but you don't know much about these entertainers in the first place. You only know what they are presenting to you on video, which is not real.
It's not necessarily because they are putting up a fake persona (although a whole lot do), it's something that just happens when you talk to a public. Try making your own private vlogs and then try making one with the idea of putting it online, or streaming: it's insane how different you sound the moment you hit that live button and how much of yourself you run through a filter even while trying to act natural. Much like social media, the you that you present to others is not really you. When the internet was young you didn't have that feeling of "showing yourself to the world", sites were like small houses, so you had a more genuine connection with the people there. But now I wouldn't say it's possible except with anonymity. The uncanny valley is everywhere now.

>>1
The type of one-sided relationship that you describe is called a "parasocial relationship".

>>3
Yeah, I realize it's a modified persona, rather than the real them, but it still creates the feeling of connection. I guess just with the fake or modified persona rather than their actual self.
>>4
Thanks, this is exactly it.

Some more thoughts:
This reminds of the idea of "hyperreality," the inability to distinguish fiction and reality. I guess a parasocial relationship is just another example of this in the modern world. Other examples of hyperreality would be makeup/clothing ads (edited skin tones or body types), subscription services (false ownership of media), social media (false presentation of life). I wonder how much of the future will just be fake things we think are real?

>>5

subscription services

Imagine growing up in a world where your family movie collection is just owned by someone else and "rented" to you? I grew up with motherfucking VHS tapes and later DVDs that we had whenever we wanted, unlike Netflix where often movies and shows are just removed when contracts run out.

>>5

I wonder how much of the future will just be fake things we think are real?

It's not the future, it's now.

>>6
My "new years resolution" for 2020 is to start compulsively hoarding digital media. Last year was a wake up call since so many websites either shut down completely or sold out and got rid of their free hosting services. I can't even tell you how many videos or songs that completely vanished from the internet that I could've saved. I'm also rebuilding my physical DVD/BD collection as an extra precaution.

>>8
bless you, doing god's work

>>8
I'm doing the exact same, good luck to you. I've been mostly hoarding up flash files, ebooks, videos, and music. Probably will move onto anime, porn, and hentai by Spring. I already went on a huge hoard for games throughout 2015 - 2018. I have about 20TB of games saved and 10TB of anime already. I just got another 8TB HDD to pump full.

>>9
You're damn right. We are the "Angels" preserving the digital world with our "brave hearts".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5EfHit2Is

>>8
>>9
>>10
What admiration is there to be had in saving things? I find it uncomfortable that you'd rather preserve other people's stuff than make your own.

>>11
They're not mutually exclusive. I save tons of stuff and still make my own software and art, doesn't mean I can't archive stuff too.

>>11
I make my own art and content as well. Been doing so since 2004 online anyways. I think my obsession came about when I had a bad crash in 2008 and lost everything I had ever done with no way to perserve it. Lost my accounts on things because I kept changing "my brand". Definitely have taken a different approach on things since those days.

>>11
Digital hoarders. Probably mostly from not having any money and being a NEET to feel somewhat accomplished.

>>14
I don't approve of hoarders, but I suddenly appreciate them when what they hoarded is taken off the net and they reupload it. I'd appreciate them more if they didn't hoard mostly porn and videogames.

>>15
Yeah, people's going to masturbate and play vidya though.

>>16
I can agree on vidya, but in the case of porn, the vast majority of it isn't rare enough to care about saving.

>>17
Depends on how niche your tastes/standards are. It's a pain in the ass to find hentai that I actually like because I'm picky. I don't even have degenerate fetishes. Between finding the genre that I like in an art style I can enjoy, I need to save the stuff I like.

>>11
Don'y do it then.
I do it because things I like disappear from the web. That's it.

I don't see how people can watch streamers. I never much liked watching people play video games and I don't very much like all of this new stuff they occupy themselves with nowadays.

Watching streams was always boring for me. The few times I did "watch" streamers, they were people on the Just Chatting category or a YT equivalent where you're basically having an actual conversation with the people. No more than 5 people in chat, and instant engagement. Still, it never felt like a good use of time.

I never was a consumer of media, but lately I've given up on online communities and I don't know what to do anymore. I used to put a lot of art and other "content" out there but, maybe it's zoomers, since the late 2010s everyone seems to only care about porn and I've found that it's not worth it to make "content" only to get negative returns. Then the same people complain that "artists" are all cunty mercenaries. Of course they are, you shoot down anyone who's driven by passion. Bleh. The internet made me really bitter about people. Now I'm hitting the gym and going on hikes. I still draw for myself, and never post a thing, but it's just not the same drive. Art is still communication. Consuming media of any kind never appealed to me.

I really wish that porn didn't exist. It really is a drug and everyone online is at least a mild addict these days. It's completely taken over all fandoms and art communities, and it's like nobody has any attrition left against it. If you do, you're obviously an anti-fun bigot. It's like a cult. People don't even look at content that isn't at least teasing for porn, or made by some chick who advertises herself as a chick. It used to be that the internet was full of nerdy people who had some depth, now it's just horny losers and people with brain problems always ruining everything being the loudest they can. Really makes you wanna quit even trying. In the early 2000s the internet community was so much more human and receptive. I'm really appalled with the state of things.

>>11
Go try and write the entirety of wikipedia by yourself. I'll wait.

>>22
Counterpoint: if you care what people think, you're clearly not "driven by passion". You are clout chasing, and I argue this is exactly the basic attitude that killed curiosity and creativity on the web. The only difference between you and the typical zoomer is that the zoomer goes one step further, and instead of merely chasing clout, he chases money (and clout is merely a way to get it to him).

>>24
Aaand here's a porn addict pulling the same tired shit every porn addict says. I still draw and make things, I just don't share it. Yeah I make art for myself, but since I do, I've stopped giving a damn about sharing it. But hey, feel free to call me a "clout chaser" for refusing to share work that nets me negative while you lick the boot of literal prostitutes.

>>25
You have now admitted that you make content of no value (porn), demonstrating that others putting you down were in fact in the right in doing so, and further proving that my assumptions that you are chasing clout and have no passion for this were well founded, although that was evident from your insistence that your "passion" in """making art""" was purely dependent on others liking your work, to the point you said you don't enjoy it otherwise.

>>26

You have now admitted that you make content of no value (porn)

LMAO what? I said I don't share my art online anymore because I see no point in it and keep it to myself instead, and you call me a clout chaser. Now you're straight up going full retard. I'm not supposed to share my work online, especially when people like you are on the receiving end. It's far more rewarding to keep it to myself, but I guess that makes me a clout chaser LOL. Schizophrenia.

>>26
Seriously are you high on something or do you hve brain damage from porn addiction? How did you get to the idea that I make porn when my whole point was complaining about people only giving a shit about porn?

>>22

I never was a consumer of media, but lately I've given up on online communities and I don't know what to do anymore

Same here. It's unbelievable how jaded I am about most corners of the Net. I've quit paying attention to anything anyone says. I don't even watch YouTube videos or read the comments or whatever the hell. If the video seems half interesting I just skim the description and see if they cited any books or articles and just check those out instead.

I don't think forgoing the consumption of all media really makes sense, but you should definitely avoid the sort of tripe most people are glued to these days. I think it all takes going back to books.

Books improve your memory, imagination and attention span. And the actual content is typically way better, or at least better thought out.

For example, on the topic of creative writing, let's compare content on YouTube to content in a good book. Content on You Tube sucks. It's a series of very inane discussions about 'tropes'. and, if you get a bit deeper, discussions about 'The Hero's Journey, which, apart from being poorly explained by the videomakers, is rather flawed as a concept.

Meanwhile books-- it's crazy how much headway I started making when I read a few books; creating tension line by line, the fact that every story expresses an ideal, and not necessarily a political one--the purpose of storytelling itself. (It is a form of 'virtual reality'. In a good story, the reader sort of 'syncs up' with the protagonist, and tags along with them as they solve the conflict of the plot. The purpose of this is to prepare fellow humans for unfamiliar situations without said persons having to experience them themselves. It is an ancient survival mechanism.)

>>29
AYRT, I'm not an avid reader but yeah, books are pretty much the only thing I "consume" at this point. And they're old books. Personally I think books are a bit overrated, in the sense that they're not necessarily a step up from other consumer junk. There's a LOT of crap in literature, especially since the bar for entry is so low; anyone can write. The quality gap is real, but it really depends on what you read.
My drive was always toward creating. I just felt this need all the time, and regardless of what that dude above spewed because I attacked his precious porn, I always set out with the idea of communicating something, telling stories, impacting someone like the great art I love impacted me. But art has mostly become a service industry where people just want a specific thing from you, and that thing is most of the time, a certain thing.
When it comes to art, I have a couple favorite artists that are huge influences on me, and stuck to those for the most part. Especially since whatever good art is being made at the moment is drowned deep into a sea of drivel (and now AI drivel, which made things 10x worse).
The good part is that once you settle on the idea that you're making art for yourself, and only yourself, and that it will stay private, it is a lot more rewarding to complete a project than it is if you were to put it online. And I get to make people like that dude seethe because he'll never see any of it.

>>30
As far as books I think you're quite right;theres a lot of crap. But I also can't help but disagree slightly. Books (or writing, in general) are an old medium; we have writings from very ancient times, well before the cultural rut we seem to be living through now. These other artistic innovations, movies, radio, tv, video games, and such, all came in quickly on each others heels as the 20th Century progressed;all of them birthed and molded by modern consumer society.

Anyway you're definitely spot on about creating art more than you consume it. I frequently think about the lives of old Renaissance artists, and how devoid of stimulation (from a modern perspective), they were.

Picture it; no movies, no TV,no videogames, few books, no recorded music. Nothing that beeps or buzzes in their pocket,breaking their concentration every few minutes.Maybe for entertainment they could go to the bar or carouse with women, but many of them likely avoided that due to religious convictions.

After that it seems to me like the only thing for them to do then was practice their art. I've got the feeling that pursuing mastery WAS entertainment for them; they had ample time, free from overstimulation, to make studies, practice composition, reconsider treatment of their subject, learn to render etc etc.

I also think it's no wonder many of them were polymaths. You have to find some way to occupy yourself when art gets a bit wearying!

>>31
Frankly I'd bet that Renaissance and pre-industrial era people in general lived much fuller lives than us. Surely we have a lot of different stimuli coming in without breaks, and we are busier than ever, but it's all noise. Even without looking at examples like Caravaggio, who had a messy life, most of these old timers had a lot of experiences under their belts. Most of them saw people die, or killed someone. They saw wars first-hand, they experienced real poverty and misery as well as real turmoil and unrest. And they had belief in God wrapping it all up for them, elevating it to some mystical level. I think our lives are far less intense than theirs.

What I am saying is that yeah, they did not have a whole lot of media to draw from, but they had a whole lot of life that did the job much better. And that's true all the way to WW2. Look at the lives of writers before the 60s, they were all people who lived a whole lot, for good of for worse. It's not like I'm wishing for the shit they've been through - by all means, I'd be lying if I said so - but sometimes I wonder if you need that kind of life to be able to make real art. If you live comfortably in this relatively safe world, and by this I mean, not having to wonder if you'll survive the winter because the crops aren't doing so well, or dying of whatever random sickness you might get that year, or getting a knife in your back because there's no real law and you had to walk back home at night; it's hard to think I have the stuff to produce "real" art, backed by "real" life. Admittedly, even if I'm passionate about the things I make, I'm still an entertainer, making little more than pulp - if any more.

>>31
The sentiment of pursuing skill resonates with me. I seriously cannot wrap my head around how people can just sit and blast their brains to bits with television, never practicing anything at all.

>>32 >33
William Gibson once said something about trauma being a common theme in the backgrounds of their favorite authors. It took a while to come around to the idea, but a good working-definition for art is media meant to expresses and explore human spirit. Propaganda does not fall under this definition, since it is created with ulterior motives. Shocking or rousing art is an exploration of the human spirit. Maybe using human spirit is too narrow and it would be better to use 'sapience'.